MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398221584 · doi:10.5430/jha.v13n2p10

Facilitators and barriers for high-reliability training in medical centers

2024· article· en· W4398221584 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Regina Knowles, Carol Jones, Blake F. Webb, Deborah E. Welsh, Peter D. Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospital Administration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Training (meteorology)Medical educationPsychologyMedicineNursingReliability engineeringEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The study aims to determine the facilitators and barriers to conducting large-scale CRM-based training in a national health care system (VHA). While there are some studies on this topic, none review training in a federal system or provide data on changes within the system.Methods: Design: Focus Groups collecting qualitative data. Review Methods: We held focus-groups for Clinical Team Training (CTT) facility Points of Contact (POC) and CTT Master Trainers. Responses were collected live and presented to all participants in each focus group session to ensure participant comfort and accuracy. All subgroup leaders agreed on iteratively and qualitatively reviewing participant responses from the four open-ended and three poll questions. Each subgroup leader was assigned a question to conduct a preliminary review of participant responses. After the initial review, a second leader also reviewed the participant responses. Over multiple iterations, themes emerged and were formalized by the team.Results: The focus groups revealed that Leadership engagement in cultural change is imperative. The focus groups also identified that language and examples used in the curriculum may have inadvertently marginalized individuals by making some non-clinical team members feel excluded as part of the team. Our results support the need for highly visible leadership engagement, adequate time to undertake and complete projects, and overcoming skepticism. See table 1 for themes from each question.Conclusions: Qualitative analysis revealed that Leadership engagement in cultural change is imperative. Focus groups identified that specific language and examples used in the curriculum may have inadvertently marginalized individuals who do not have clinical backgrounds. In addition, some participants felt that the use of the term “Projects” created a negative connotation for the required quality improvement project on each unit and instead preferred the terms “micro-project,” “safety strategy,” or “quick wins.”Implemented changes: The program’s name has been rebranded to NCPS Team Training, taking the word clinical out to be more inclusive of all team members who engage in the care of a patient in the clinical setting. A complimentary video series was developed for facility Master Trainers to use as a supplement to their teaching or exclusively as the teaching tool as they facilitate the tabletop simulation exercises. Another change is that the Unit Based Safety Project has been renamed as Unit Based Safety Initiative (UBSI) to remove the stigma of a “project.”

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospital AdministrationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207